Why I Was Fired by Google | WSJ

The reality is that men and women are different on average, so of course Google will end up having more men than women engineers.

BUT even hyperrational aspies like Damore (and frankly me) are subject to the ecological fallacy, and will see a female colleague and think "She's a women and therefore less likely to be a good engineer" instead of "She works at Google and therefore is presumably a good engineer".

The people in charge have concluded that saying there is no biological reason for the gender disparity is easier and more effective than documenting all the subtle and egregious ways that people in tech underestimate their female colleagues and teaching them to stop.

Wojcicki's response is about as close as I've seen anybody come to the truth: http://fortune.com/2017/08/09/google-diversity-memo-wojcicki/
The reality is that men and women are different on average, so of course Google will end up having more men than women engineers.
BUT even hyperrational aspies like Damore (and frankly me) are subject to the ecological fallacy, and will see a female colleague and think "She's a women and therefore less likely to be a good engineer" instead of "She works at Google and therefore is presumably a good engineer".
The people in charge have concluded that saying there is no biological reason for the gender disparity is easier and more effective than documenting all the subtle and egregious ways that people in tech underestimate their female colleagues and teaching them to stop.

What? That response contains nothing but the usual tripe, right down to the "what will I tell the children!?!?!" BS.

The ranks of the top coders are almost all male. I've repeated it ad nauseam, but 95% of open source contributors are male. All finalists of Google Code Jam, Facebook Hacker Cup, Informatics Olympiad, programming contests, etc are male. And Google likes to hire these kinds of people (because they are good programmers, duh). James Damore was hired from one of these contests. Now suppose you are one of these coders, and you find out that Google has a numerical target for women engineers. So you do a little search on some of your colleagues. Do they have a GitHub page? Did they win a collegiate programming contest? If not, why shouldn't you believe that you are a better coder than them?

Wojcicki's response is about as close as I've seen anybody come to the truth: http://fortune.com/2017/08/09/google-diversity-memo-wojcicki/
The reality is that men and women are different on average, so of course Google will end up having more men than women engineers.
BUT even hyperrational aspies like Damore (and frankly me) are subject to the ecological fallacy, and will see a female colleague and think "She's a women and therefore less likely to be a good engineer" instead of "She works at Google and therefore is presumably a good engineer".

Wojcicki's response is about as close as I've seen anybody come to the truth: http://fortune.com/2017/08/09/google-diversity-memo-wojcicki/
The reality is that men and women are different on average, so of course Google will end up having more men than women engineers.
BUT even hyperrational aspies like Damore (and frankly me) are subject to the ecological fallacy, and will see a female colleague and think "She's a women and therefore less likely to be a good engineer" instead of "She works at Google and therefore is presumably a good engineer".

Many people have asserted that conditional on working at Google, the female programmers are no different than the male programmers. This seems to be an assertion made without evidence.

Of course any programmer who works at Google is likely to be exceptionally talented relative to the general population of programmers, who are in turn highly selected, male or female, from the general population. But is there any actual evidence that the average female programmer at Google---or even in tech generally---is as good as the average male programmer?

Note that even if Google is entirely sex-blind when hiring programmers,

E(ability|hired by Google, male)

is not generally equal to

E(ability|hired by Google, female),

and the first expectation will be higher than the second if there are more men in the extreme right tail of the distribution of programming talent and Google is non-discriminatory in hiring.

Imagine if your daughter or wife were a woman working on a project where the Google manifesto guy we're the team leader. What kind of an evaluation would they receive from him? Do you really think it would be a fair assessment? Do keep in mind that their employment, raises, and bonuses depend on this guy's "fair" evaluation.

Wojcicki's response is about as close as I've seen anybody come to the truth: http://fortune.com/2017/08/09/google-diversity-memo-wojcicki/
The reality is that men and women are different on average, so of course Google will end up having more men than women engineers.
BUT even hyperrational aspies like Damore (and frankly me) are subject to the ecological fallacy, and will see a female colleague and think "She's a women and therefore less likely to be a good engineer" instead of "She works at Google and therefore is presumably a good engineer".
The people in charge have concluded that saying there is no biological reason for the gender disparity is easier and more effective than documenting all the subtle and egregious ways that people in tech underestimate their female colleagues and teaching them to stop.

What? That response contains nothing but the usual tripe, right down to the "what will I tell the children!?!?!" BS.
The ranks of the top coders are almost all male. I've repeated it ad nauseam, but 95% of open source contributors are male. All finalists of Google Code Jam, Facebook Hacker Cup, Informatics Olympiad, programming contests, etc are male. And Google likes to hire these kinds of people (because they are good programmers, duh). James Damore was hired from one of these contests. Now suppose you are one of these coders, and you find out that Google has a numerical target for women engineers. So you do a little search on some of your colleagues. Do they have a GitHub page? Did they win a collegiate programming contest? If not, why shouldn't you believe that you are a better coder than them?

Imagine if your daughter or wife were a woman working on a project where the Google manifesto guy we're the team leader. What kind of an evaluation would they receive from him? Do you really think it would be a fair assessment? Do keep in mind that their employment, raises, and bonuses depend on this guy's "fair" evaluation.

That depends. Did my daughter or wife get hired based on numerical quotas?

Imagine if your daughter or wife were a woman working on a project where the Google manifesto guy we're the team leader. What kind of an evaluation would they receive from him? Do you really think it would be a fair assessment? Do keep in mind that their employment, raises, and bonuses depend on this guy's "fair" evaluation.

Another retard who can't tell that the memo was about population differences and not individuals

An inconvenient question:
Many people have asserted that conditional on working at Google, the female programmers are no different than the male programmers. This seems to be an assertion made without evidence.
Of course any programmer who works at Google is likely to be exceptionally talented relative to the general population of programmers, who are in turn highly selected, male or female, from the general population. But is there any actual evidence that the average female programmer at Google---or even in tech generally---is as good as the average male programmer?
Note that even if Google is entirely sex-blind when hiring programmers,
E(ability|hired by Google, male)
is not generally equal to
E(ability|hired by Google, female),
and the first expectation will be higher than the second if there are more men in the extreme right tail of the distribution of programming talent and Google is non-discriminatory in hiring.

Under plausible assumptions (tail distribution approximately exponential), they are in fact equal.

Whatever the evidence on the relative ability of male and female engineers is, there is substantial evidence that people consistently underestimate the ability of female engineers relative to males. So independent of its objective truth, the statement "men and women at Google have the same ability on average" should cause people to update their beliefs in the direction of the truth. (Whether or not this is a stable long-term policy is a separate question.)

Imagine if your daughter or wife were a woman working on a project where the Google manifesto guy we're the team leader. What kind of an evaluation would they receive from him? Do you really think it would be a fair assessment? Do keep in mind that their employment, raises, and bonuses depend on this guy's "fair" evaluation.

Another retard who can't tell that the memo was about population differences and not individuals

Exactly. So if I say that population x is for whatever reasons (including simply being more interested in the subject) more inclined to be data scientistis than population y, than it is offensive for population y? wtf? I get that people are oversensitive these days, but I don't even see how this is offensive unless he had claimed that population y is inferior, which he didn't